Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Suzanne van de Vathorst is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Suzanne van de Vathorst.


Palliative Medicine | 2013

Opinions of health care professionals and the public after eight years of euthanasia legislation in the Netherlands: A mixed methods approach

Pauline S. C. Kouwenhoven; Natasja Raijmakers; Johannes J. M. van Delden; Judith Rietjens; Maartje Schermer; Ghislaine J.M.W. van Thiel; Margo Trappenburg; Suzanne van de Vathorst; Bea J. van der Vegt; Cristiano Vezzoni; Heleen Weyers; Donald van Tol; Agnes van der Heide

Background: The practice of euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide (PAS) in the Netherlands has been regulated since 2002 by the Euthanasia Act. In the ongoing debate about the interpretation of this Act, comparative information about the opinions of the different stakeholders is needed. Aim: To evaluate the opinions of Dutch physicians, nurses and the general public on the legal requirements for euthanasia and PAS. Design: A cross-sectional survey among Dutch physicians and nurses in primary and secondary care and members of the Dutch general public, followed by qualitative interviews among selected respondents. The participants were: 793 physicians, 1243 nurses and 1960 members of the general public who completed the questionnaire; 83 were interviewed. Results: Most respondents agreed with the requirement of a patient request (64–88%) and the absence of a requirement concerning life expectancy (48–71%). PAS was thought acceptable by 24–39% of respondents for patients requesting it because of mental suffering due to loss of control, chronic depression or early dementia. In the case of severe dementia, one third of physicians, 58% of nurses and 77% of the general public agreed with performing euthanasia based on an advance directive. Interviewees illustrated these findings and supported the Act. Conclusions: Health care professionals and the general public mostly support the legal requirements for euthanasia and PAS. The law permits euthanasia or PAS for mental suffering but this possibility is not widely endorsed. The general public is more liberal towards euthanasia for advanced dementia than health care professionals. We conclude that there is ample support for the law after eight years of legal euthanasia.


Journal of Medical Ethics | 2015

Treatment-resistant major depressive disorder and assisted dying

Udo Schuklenk; Suzanne van de Vathorst

Competent patients suffering from treatment-resistant depressive disorder should be treated no different in the context of assisted dying to other patients suffering from chronic conditions that render their lives permanently not worth living to them. Jurisdictions that are considering, or that have, decriminalised assisted dying are discriminating unfairly against patients suffering from treatment-resistant depression if they exclude such patients from the class of citizens entitled to receive assistance in dying.


Pediatric Drugs | 2015

Ethics of Drug Research in the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit

Niina Kleiber; Krista Tromp; Miriam G. Mooij; Suzanne van de Vathorst; Dick Tibboel; Saskia N. de Wildt

Critical illness and treatment modalities change pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of medications used in critically ill children, in addition to age-related changes in drug disposition and effect. Hence, to ensure effective and safe drug therapy, research in this population is urgently needed. However, conducting research in the vulnerable population of the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) presents with ethical challenges. This article addresses the main ethical issues specific to drug research in these critically ill children and proposes several solutions. The extraordinary environment of the PICU raises specific challenges to the design and conduct of research. The need for proxy consent of parents (or legal guardians) and the stress-inducing physical environment may threaten informed consent. The informed consent process is challenging because emergency research reduces or even eliminates the time to seek consent. Moreover, parental anxiety may impede adequate understanding and generate misconceptions. Alternative forms of consent have been developed taking into account the unpredictable reality of the acute critical care environment. As with any research in children, the burden and risk should be minimized. Recent developments in sample collection and analysis as well as pharmacokinetic analysis should be considered in the design of studies. Despite the difficulties inherent to drug research in critically ill children, methods are available to conduct ethically sound research resulting in relevant and generalizable data. This should motivate the PICU community to commit to drug research to ultimately provide the right drug at the right dose for every individual child.


BMC Medical Ethics | 2015

Opinions about euthanasia and advanced dementia: a qualitative study among Dutch physicians and members of the general public

Pauline S. C. Kouwenhoven; Natasja Raijmakers; Johannes J. M. van Delden; Judith Rietjens; Donald van Tol; Suzanne van de Vathorst; Nienke de Graeff; Heleen Weyers; Agnes van der Heide; Ghislaine J.M.W. van Thiel

BackgroundThe Dutch law states that a physician may perform euthanasia according to a written advance euthanasia directive (AED) when a patient is incompetent as long as all legal criteria of due care are met. This may also hold for patients with advanced dementia. We investigated the differing opinions of physicians and members of the general public on the acceptability of euthanasia in patients with advanced dementia.MethodsIn this qualitative study, 16 medical specialists, 19 general practitioners, 16 elderly physicians and 16 members of the general public were interviewed and asked for their opinions about a vignette on euthanasia based on an AED in a patient with advanced dementia.ResultsMembers of the general public perceived advanced dementia as a debilitating and degrading disease. Physicians emphasized the need for direct communication with the patient when making decisions about euthanasia. Respondent from both groups acknowledged difficulties in the assessment of patients’ autonomous wishes and the unbearableness of their suffering.ConclusionLegally, an AED may replace direct communication with patients about their request for euthanasia. In practice, physicians are reluctant to forego adequate verbal communication with the patient because they wish to verify the voluntariness of patients’ request and the unbearableness of suffering. For this reason, the applicability of AEDs in advanced dementia seems limited.


Best Practice & Research in Clinical Gastroenterology | 2014

Artificial nutrition at the end of life: Ethical issues

Suzanne van de Vathorst

Artificial nutrition is a medical treatment that first of all needs a sound scientific base before prescribing it. This base is absent for dying patients and patients in the end stage of dementia. Because feeding is a very emotional and symbolical issue, patient and family may request this treatment despite the lack of evidence. These issues should be addressed in good communication with patient and relatives. For comatose patients and patients in a persistent vegetative state artificial nutrition is a necessary support to bridge the time until either recovery is imminent or improbable. At that moment artificial nutrition no longer contributes to the life of the patient and should be ceased. Artificial nutrition has no place in patients that voluntary decide to stop eating and drinking in order to die.


Social Science & Medicine | 2015

Children's self reported discomforts as participants in clinical research.

Mira S. Staphorst; Joke A. M. Hunfeld; Suzanne van de Vathorst; Jan Passchier; Johannes B. van Goudoever

INTRODUCTION There is little empirical evidence on childrens subjective experiences of discomfort during clinical research procedures. Therefore, Institutional Review Boards have limited empirical information to guide their decision-making on discomforts for children in clinical research. To get more insight into what childrens discomforts are during clinical research procedures, we interviewed a group of children on this topic and also asked for suggestions to reduce possible discomforts. MATERIALS AND METHODS Forty-six children (aged 6-18) participating in clinical research studies (including needle-related procedures, food provocation tests, MRI scans, pulmonary function tests, questionnaires) were interviewed about their experiences during the research procedures. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the interviews. RESULTS The discomforts of the interviewed children could be divided into two main groups: physical and mental discomforts. The majority experienced physical discomforts during the research procedures: pain, shortness of breath, nausea, itchiness, and feeling hungry, which were often caused by needle procedures, some pulmonary procedures, and food provocation tests. Mental discomforts included anxiousness because of anticipated pain and not knowing what to expect from a research procedure, boredom and tiredness during lengthy research procedures and waiting, and embarrassment during Tanner staging. Childrens suggestions to reduce the discomforts of the research procedures were providing distraction (e.g. watching a movie or listening to music), providing age-appropriate information and shortening the duration of lengthy procedures. DISCUSSION Our study shows that children can experience various discomforts during research procedures, and it provides information about how these discomforts can be reduced according to them. Further research is needed with larger samples to study the number of children that experience these mentioned discomforts during research procedures in a quantitative way.


Monash bioethics review | 2015

Beyond competence: advance directives in dementia research

Karin Jongsma; Suzanne van de Vathorst

Dementia is highly prevalent and incurable. The participation of dementia patients in clinical research is indispensable if we want to find an effective treatment for dementia. However, one of the primary challenges in dementia research is the patients’ gradual loss of the capacity to consent. Patients with dementia are characterized by the fact that, at an earlier stage of their life, they were able to give their consent to participation in research. Therefore, the phase when patients are still competent to decide offers a valuable opportunity to authorize research, by using an advance research directive (ARD). Yet, the use of ARDs as an authorization for research participation remains controversial. In this paper we discuss the role of autonomous decision-making and the protection of incompetent research subjects. We will show why ARDs are a morally defensible basis for the inclusion of this population in biomedical research and that the use of ARDs is compatible with the protection of incompetent research subjects.


Journal of Medical Ethics | 2015

Treatment-resistant major depressive disorder and assisted dying: response to comments

Udo Schuklenk; Suzanne van de Vathorst

The commentaries responding to our article on treatment-resistant depression and assisted dying focus on the following issues: epistemological questions about death, patient competence, the role of doctors, the moral basis of the right to an assisted death, safety and security of patients, and questions about various cases that occurred in the Netherlands. We will address in our response each of these concerns, beginning with the last issue first. Dr den Hartogh mentions a case in the Netherlands where the Dutch review committee deemed ‘the doctor … not careful’.1 This case was published after we submitted our paper. The case was judged ‘not careful’ because no psychiatrist had been consulted to consider the competence of the patient, and to review whether the patients situation was truly of a hopelessness nature. In this case, the doctor who performed the euthanasia and the consultant were general practitioners. This case does not undermine our argument. The review committee did not suggest that the patient was incompetent. In our paper, we are careful to consider only treatment-resistant competent patients. Dr Cowley mentions the so-called Chabot case and the Brongersma case.2 In the Netherlands, the Brongersma case is not discussed under the label ‘depression’, but as a case of a patient who was ‘tired of life’.3 Eighty-six-year-old former politician Edward Brongersma did not suffer from a mental or other illness. It deserves a separate discussion and is outside the scope of our paper. The Chabot case was extraordinary because the patient had no wish to be cured from her depression because she felt depression to be an appropriate state to be in after the premature deaths of her two sons.4 This case also falls outside the scope of our paper. Drs Broome and de Cates begin their discussion with an epistemological argument …


Journal of Medical Ethics | 2016

The implausibility of response shifts in dementia patients

Karin Jongsma; Mirjam A. G. Sprangers; Suzanne van de Vathorst

Dementia patients may express wishes that do not conform to or contradict earlier expressed preferences. Our understanding of the difference between their prior preferences and current wishes has important consequences for the way we deal with advance directives. Some bioethicists and gerontologists have argued that dementia patients change because they undergo a ‘response shift’. In this paper we question this assumption. We will show that proponents of the response shift use the term imprecisely and that response shift is not the right model to explain what happens to dementia patients. We propose a different explanation for the changed wishes of dementia patients and conclude that advance directives of dementia patients cannot be simply put aside.


European Journal of Pediatrics | 2016

Motivations of children and their parents to participate in drug research: a systematic review

Krista Tromp; C. Michel Zwaan; Suzanne van de Vathorst

ABSTRACTInformation on motivations for research participation, may enable professionals to better tailor the process of recruitment and informed consent to the perspective of parents and children. Therefore, this systematic review assesses motivating and discouraging factors for children and their parents to decide to participate in clinical drug research. Studies were identified from searches in 6 databases. Two independent reviewers screened and selected relevant articles. Results were aggregated and presented by use of qualitative metasummary. 38 studies fulfilled the selection criteria and were of sufficient quality for inclusion in the qualitative metasummary. Most mentioned motivating factors for parents were: health benefit for child, altruism, trust in research, and relation to researcher. Most mentioned motivating factors for children were: personal health benefit, altruism and increasing comfort. Fear of risks, distrust in research, logistical aspects and disruption of daily life were mentioned most by parents as discouraging factors. Burden and disruption of daily life, feeling like a “guinea pig” and fear of risks were most mentioned as discouraging factors by children. Conclusion: Paying attention to these motivating and discouraging factors of children and their parents during the recruitment and informed consent process in drug research increases the moral and instrumental value of informed consent.What is known:• This systematic review pools the existing empirical literature on motivations of minors and their parents to consent or dissent to participation in clinical drug research.• The most mentioned motivating and discouraging factors for children and their parents to consent to participation in clinical drug research are identified aggregated and presented by use of qualitative metasummary.What is new:• This information can be used to adapt the research protocol, recruitment, and informed consent/assent process to the needs of children and their parents.

Collaboration


Dive into the Suzanne van de Vathorst's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Inez de Beaufort

Erasmus University Rotterdam

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Donald van Tol

University Medical Center Groningen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Krista Tromp

Erasmus University Rotterdam

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Mira S. Staphorst

Erasmus University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Karin Jongsma

University of Göttingen

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Joke A. M. Hunfeld

Erasmus University Rotterdam

View shared research outputs
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge